Reasonable doubt...All truthers(and whoever esle) please read

tmd2_1 said:
As far as this evidence goes, see what I said about the FBI. They said we have no hard evidence against him. Not that it is confidential, or anything of the sort, you can take this point up with the FBI.
Click to expand...

You have been asked why, if it is so suspicious, didn't the FBI simply formally accuse OBL of 9-11? Do you think it wasn't in their power? The government had just pulled off the hoax of the century! What is your answer? Did you "take the point up with the FBI"?

With hijackers being alive, there are so many reports from mainstream sources, it casts serious doubt to the official story.
Click to expand...

I challenge you to find a single "alive" hijacker, or even a report from a mainstream source that turned out to be true. I'll wait.
 
Last edited:
tmd2_1 said:
With hijackers being alive, there are so many reports from mainstream sources, it casts serious doubt to the official story.
Click to expand...
Dude, in nearly 10 years no truther has been able to show a single hijacker is still alive, and yet they keep making the claim!

Seriously, proving someone is alive should be about the easiest thing to prove. All you have to do is present the person in question. Why do you think no truther has been able to do this?

Maybe they're not alive? :rolleyes:
 
Dayan81 said:
As of today there is still no compelling evidence or reasonable doubt to question the prevailing understanding of how 9-11 took place.

19 hijackers hijacked four planes, hit three targets and crashed one plane in Pennsylvania.

This is all that happened according to the best evidence we have.

Everything else is simply speculation, baseless claims, willfull misunderstanding, paranoia and a pinch of bigotry.
Click to expand...

As far as the evidence goes...and this is the last time I will state this, in this thread see what I said about the FBI. They said we have no hard evidence against him. Not that it is confidential, or anything of the sort, you can take this point up with the FBI. Why should anyone question them?
 
tmd2_1 said:
I've seen every last piece of video as it involves Lloyde England and I do know what hedge funds are...again only looking for reasonable doubt
Click to expand...

1. Lloyde, well then you have not seen the raw video because CIT refuses to release it. C'mon man, don't be a sucker.

2. I did not ask you what a hedge fund was, I asked you if you know what a hedge is, and how an institutional investor used the put options as part of a hedge? You knew that, right? And that the vast majority of the rest of the options were traced to subscribers of a newsletter who recommended acquiring puts?

You knew that right? I mean this is all available in the 911 commission public release, every page of which you MUST have read, right, esquire?
 
twinstead said:
A good example is the alive hijackers lie. While there were some reports initially mainly due to similar names and mistaken identity, it is now understood that NONE of the hijackers is alive, yet you insist on still bringing it up. Please support your contention or stop using it as "evidence".
Click to expand...


Also, when you look at the alive hijackers section of 911myths you can see that they had different spellings of names, different birthdates, different families and a rather important one - they look different.

But of course it still doesnt make any sense why the "hijackers" would be alive anyway.
 
BUMP as it was at the bottom of the last page..


Not that we can reply to everything in your post here since 100% of it has been done to death on the forum already... but I picked out a couple of things.


tmd2_1 said:
WTC 7 early reporting each time gets -1% because it is indicative of someone giving out information of something that was to happen. An indication that someone had prior knowledge.
Click to expand...

Yea, the firefighters that said they knew it was going to collapse hours before because of how unstable it was looking. :rolleyes:

Witnesses (some very credible) say they saw Molten Steel (including the melting of the beams), and pictures of what appears to be Molten steel -1%. Molten steel would create doubts to the official story. Jet fuel can not burn hot enough to melt steel, nothing in normal office fires can burn hot enough to melt steel so what could have done it? This includes Leslie Robertson and Peter Tully. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3SLIzSCt_cg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fs_ogSbQFbM
Click to expand...

Molten steel witness' in a fire is totally unremarkable:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f_sNl7l6tOU
Click to expand...
 
tmd2_1:

I might have missed it but. How did you assign your percentages. As far as I can tell they have no connection to the amount of evidence for the "official story".

In my mind this is the first point you need to "make".
 
twinstead said:
You have been asked why, if it is so suspicious, didn't the FBI simply formally accuse OBL of 9-11? Do you think it wasn't in their power? The government had just pulled off the hoax of the century! What is your answer? Did you "take the point up with the FBI"?



I challenge you to find a single "alive" hijacker, or even a report from a mainstream source that turned out to be true. I'll wait.
Click to expand...

As I said...this guy was accused of committing the greatest crime in American history, we've been at war 10 years because of this, and they can't even get an indictment? Don't have any hard evidence?

As far as the hijackers being alive...go here. It's all referenced.

http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/hijackers.html
 
tmd2_1 said:
First while I have no power to prosecute or not prosecute anyone, I do call for the release of KSM. At the very least I would like it to be a fair, open, honest, and public hearing. This can only happen in another country, hopefully with jurors who know as little as possible about 911.
Click to expand...

And what country would this be? Narnia? :dl:

Who is independent enough to even decide which country should hold the "open, honest and public hearing"? You? Me? Alex Jones? Who?

Who would/could chair such a meeting? Gage? Judy Wood? You?

What qualifications, in your opinion, would be suitable to qualify someone as an independent expert and sit on the aforementioned panel?

Would that include people with military expertise?

Wouldn't they be compromised having already worked for "The Man"?

Or, for that matter, anyone that's been to university/college because they've been educated (meaning brainwashed/programmed) by "The Man".

Please explain the mechanics of this new investigation. It's your plan so you should have no trouble.

Thanks in advance. :)
 
tmd2_1 said:
As far as this evidence goes, see what I said about the FBI. They said we have no hard evidence against him. Not that it is confidential, or anything of the sort, you can take this point up with the FBI.
Click to expand...
I did. They told me the "no hard evidence" comment ""does not accurately explain the situation".
 
tmd2_1 said:
As far as the evidence goes...and this is the last time I will state this, in this thread see what I said about the FBI. They said we have no hard evidence against him. Not that it is confidential, or anything of the sort, you can take this point up with the FBI. Why should anyone question them?
Click to expand...
The FBI also says they collected the DNA of almost all the passengers, crew, and hijackers inside the Pentagon wreckage along with the airplane that was Flight 77.

But you'll reject that FBI, right? :rolleyes:
 
MikeW said:
I did. They told me the "no hard evidence" comment ""does not accurately explain the situation".
Click to expand...

Great have them officially say something to that affect, or release it officially. They said what they said, it's not my fault.
 
tmd2_1 said:
As I said...this guy was accused of committing the greatest crime in American history, we've been at war 10 years because of this, and they can't even get an indictment? Don't have any hard evidence?

As far as the hijackers being alive...go here. It's all referenced.

http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/hijackers.html
Click to expand...

I'm not even going to bother clicking on that. You said MAINSTREAM media. Please provide the appropriate link.


edit:
Ok, I clicked on it and was presented with pretty much what I expected. ZERO evidence of them being alive.

you SUCK at this. Really.
 
Last edited:
TheBigKahuna said:
You must have missed this the first time! ;)
Well, OBL confessed:

http://abcnews.go.com/International/...ssion-13506877

Now that your client has confessed, in an environment where coercion was impossible, the reasonable doubt is 0% and he must be found guilty.

Any questions?
Click to expand...

I apologize...I was getting to it. Look at this link, it is an interview from October 2001 from newspaper in Pakistan (a major newspaper) which one am I to believe. This or that tape? http://www.public-action.com/911/oblintrv.html

Besides authenticating that tape would be difficult. As I understood it, it was just lying around a house somewhere in Afghanistan. Seems a little weird to me.
 
Last edited:
NoahFence said:
I'm not even going to bother clicking on that. You said MAINSTREAM media. Please provide the appropriate link.
Click to expand...

*sigh* go there..it is all referenced with mainstream sources. You can find the one's you like the best.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom